Gerry Matatics is a
self-professed Catholic and sedevacantist who – although he
objects to the word “sedevacantist” – rejects the
Second Vatican Council as heretical, and John XXIII, Paul VI, John
Paul I, John Paul II, Benedict XVI and Francis as heretics and
therefore antipopes.

Gerry, a former Presbyterian minister,
along with his wife, converted to what they thought was Catholicism
about 20 years ago after previously making a solemn pact with fellow
Presbyterian Scott Hahn to convert “all Catholics out of the
Church”. After studying Catholic Theology as a protestant to
better “grasp the beast” the duo eventually “converted”
to the Vatican II Church not long after they realized they had been
on the wrong side all along! Regrettably, their conversion was not to
the Catholic Faith, however, but to the Vatican 2 sect.

Gerry eventually came to embrace the
sedevacantist position, although some sedevacantists dispute his
orthodoxy as a Catholic.

Gerry Matatics Beliefs

About Gerry Matatics (from
his own website): "The first PCA minister ever to become Roman
Catholic, Gerry is the only one of the dozens of Protestant-minister
“converts” of the last twenty-five years to end up fully
embracing the traditional Catholic Faith, abstaining (as did the
Catholic recusants during the English Reformation) not only from the
“New Mass” but also from those pseudo-Tridentine Masses
offered by invalidly or illicitly ordained Catholic priests, or
offered according to the unauthorized 1962 Missal of antipope John
XXIII and in union with antipope Benedict XVI, such as the Masses
offered by the FSSP, the SSPX, and similar clergy."

Gerry Matatics, Unauthorized
Shepherds: Why the SSPX, SSPV, CMRI, and similar post-Vatican II
traditionalist clergy are not priests of Christ's one, holy,
Catholic, and apostolic Church: "During the crisis and
confusion of these prophesied last days true Catholics must avoid,
not only the counterfeit Catholicism of the "left" (the
new religion of Vatican II) but also the equally counterfeit
Catholicism of the "right," represented by those who
believe the current situation in the Church gives them carte
blanche to become, by hook or by crook, priests and bishops --
in defiance, not only of Church law, but even immutable divine law,
which neither "epikeia," a "state of emergency,"
or "supplied jurisdiction" can successfully dispense the
would-be priest or bishop from. Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition,
the Doctors of the Church, and the Magisterium all consistently
teach that the Church's clergy must always and necessarily possess a
divine mission and authorization in order to legitimate, validate,
and make salvifically efficacious their priestly activities[*].
Since the clergy of such unauthorized groups as the SSPX, SSPV, CMRI
et al, lack such a mission, these men are therefore NOT priests of
the Christ's one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church, but merely
the priests of various man-made traditionalist sects. As such, they
are off-limits to true Catholics, upon peril of our eternal
salvation."

[*]Council of Trent,
Session 23, Canon 7, July 15, 1563: “If
anyone say…
that those who
have not been rightly ordained by ecclesiastical and canonical power
and have not been sent [by the Church], but come from some other
source [such as a heretical or schismatical source], are lawful
ministers of the word and of the sacraments: let him be anathema.”
(Denzinger 967)

Council of Trent, Session 23,
Chapter 4, July 15, 1563: “The holy Synod teaches, furthermore,
that in the ordination of bishops, priests, and of other orders, the
consent, or call, or authority of the people, or of any secular power
or magistrate is not so required for the validity of the ordination;
but rather it decrees that those who are called and instituted only
by the people, or by the civil power or magistrate and proceed to
exercise these offices, and that those who by their own
temerity take these offices upon themselves, are not
ministers of the Church, but are to be regarded as "thieves and
robbers, who have not entered by the door" [cf. John
10:1; can. 8].” (Denzinger 960)

Pope Pius VI, Auctorem fidei,
Aug. 28, 1794: “The proposition which states "that
power has been given by God to the Church, that it might be
communicated to the pastors who are its ministers for the salvation
of souls"; if thus understood that the power of
ecclesiastical ministry and of rule is derived from the COMMUNITY of
the faithful to the pastors,--[condemned as] heretical.”
(Denzinger 1502)

Plainly
no necessity, no claim of epikeia can override, even in an extreme
need, an obligation derived, not from human law, but from Divine law
infallibly proposed as such by the Church (such as the Divine Law
that forbids Catholics to communicate in the sacraments with
non-Catholics and heretics).

Gerry Matatics, Bonding with
Benedict: The Catastrophic Consequences of Attending A Mass Offered
"Una Cum" (in ecclesial union with) Benedict XVI:
"This explosive, in-depth, four-hour interview examines the
Church's authoritative teaching regarding the impossibility of
escaping ecclesial union with the man mentioned in the opening
prayer (the Te Igitur) of the Canon of the Mass as being the head of
the Church; everyone attending such a Mass identifies himself or
herself as being a member of the church of which that man is the
head. But if Joseph Ratzinger, aka Benedict XVI, is an unrepentant
modernist (albeit a relatively and cleverly "conservative"
one) and therefore a heretic and therefore an antipope, and if the
Vatican II church is in fact but a counterfeit of the true Catholic
Church, then everyone attending a Mass naming Benedict as pope in
the Canon thereby OBJECTIVELY places himself in that counterfeit
church and thus outside the true Church (since one cannot have "dual
membership" simultaneously in both the true and the false
church), and it is a dogma of the Faith that outside the true Church
there is no salvation. This applies not only to those attending the
Vatican II-mandated "New Mass" but also those
"traditionalists" who attend "Tridentine" Masses
naming Benedict, including the SSPX and all other non-sedevacantist
"traditionalist" clergy. Gerry's discussion comments,
point by point, on "Father" Anthony Cekada's 19-page
article "The Grain of Incense," not only because of the
positive aspects of that article (definitely demolishing as it does
not only the SSPX position but also the "John Lane"
position that sedevacantists may attend such Masses without harm),
but because at several points Cekada unintentionally undermines the
legitimacy of his own priesthood (which he obtained under the
auspices of the SSPX) as well as of his subsequent sedevacantist
priestly "apostolate." This has inescapable ramifications
for all sedevacantist "clergy" ordained post-Vatican II."

About Gerry Matatics (from
his own website): "Gerry uncompromisingly rejects as
constituting a counterfeit Catholicism all the doctrinal,
liturgical, and moral novelties previously condemned by the Church
but now emanating from Rome since 1958, such as ecumenism, religious
liberty, the survival and salvific sufficiency of the Old Covenant
in our day, interfaith worship, altar girls, etc. He rejects as
heretics and therefore false “popes” those who have
sought to foist these manifestly unorthodox abominations upon
Catholics — namely John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I & II,
and now Benedict XVI."

Is Gerry Matatics a
''sedevacantist''? (from his own website): "It goes without
saying that I do not necessarily agree with or endorse every detail
of every article on these other [sedevacantist] websites, especially
on other matters. Particularly is this true with regard to their
various views on the hotly-debated dogma extra ecclesiam nulla
salus ("outside the Church no salvation"). Some of
these websites take too unacceptably liberal a view of this
dogma, holding, for example, that those who do not profess the
Catholic Faith could still be saved -- despite the clear teaching of
the Athanasian Creed and infallible papal pronouncements to the
contrary. Others of these websites, such as that of the Dimond
brothers, take too unacceptably rigorist a view of this
dogma, uncharitably and unjustly anathematizing as hell-bound
heretics those [obstinate people] who today might hold -- as did St.
Thomas Aquinas, St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Alphonsus de Liguori, and
in fact every single doctor of the Church and every catechism and
theological manual used by the Church for the last millennium -- to
the remote possibility of salvation for Catholic catechumens who
hold the Catholic Faith and who possess perfect charity and perfect
contrition for their sins, and thus might qualify to receive the
grace of the sacrament of baptism when they are unable, through no
fault of their own, to receive the sacrament itself -- especially if
these spiritual qualities are evidenced by their martyrdom for the
Catholic Faith. Such a rare occurrence would still require the
existence of the sacrament of baptism and derive its efficacy from
the sacrament, thus arguably not negating John 3:5 and similar papal
statements. This would be the classic doctrine -- not the modern
liberal version thereof -- of "baptism by desire" and
"baptism by blood," admittedly never dogmatically defined
by any pope or council, but equally admittedly never explicitly
condemned by any pope or council either. At best this
teaching is a tolerable theological opinion within the parameters of
Catholic orthodoxy, certainly not de fide but arguably
proximate to faith. At worst it is an error, as yet
uncondemned by the magisterium, but certainly not a heresy,
since saints and doctors held and taught it (seemingly with the full
approval of Rome) and died without abjuring it (so far as we know),
and yet were canonized and officially declared trustworthy Doctors
of the Faith. The Dimond brothers, be it noted, have, among their
other demonstrable errors -- such as having declared John Paul II
(while he was still alive) to be "the final Antichrist"(!)
-- persisted, even after I have corrected them, in libelously
misrepresenting me as having "sold out" to those who teach
the liberal view that one can be saved in other religions, which is
a damnable lie, since I have never at any time held to this heresy,
nor have I for a single moment ever considered to be a Catholic
anyone holding to this heresy. Their outrageous and mortally sinful
calumny that I am a supporter of this heresy nevertheless remains
prominently featured in the "Beware (groups and individuals who
teach heresy)" section of their website."

Comment: For the Church's correct
teaching on Baptism of Blood and Baptism of Desire and
Salvation Outside the Church, see:

What Most Holy Family Monastery says
about Gerry Matatics

Gerry sells out to those who believe
in salvation for non-Catholics

Gerry Matatics

Dear Brothers
Dimond

I am rather confused by the different positions rumored
to be taken by Gerry Matatics on EENS/necessity of water baptism to
be saved. I thought he endorsed your website and Brother Peter
Dimond's book refuting Baptism of Desire and Baptism of Blood, as
evidenced by some e-mail responses from him featured some short while
ago on your website. But a discussion forum moderated by John Lane
features a photograph of Gerry with John Lane at the recent Fatima
Conference in Spokane last week, as well as anecdotal statements from
people who met Gerry and were told by him that he is not a Feeneyite
and supports Baptism of Desire. Apparently he has read a pamphlet
written by a nun entitled "Father Feeney The Pope Has Spoken"
which convinced him of the magisterial status of the condemnation of
Feeneyism by the prelates acting in Pius XII's name…Are you
able to shed any light on what is going on with Gerry?

Thank you.

Michael

MHFM: Thanks for the question. As we
had mentioned on our website, Gerry Matatics had distributed and sold
our book Outside the Catholic Church There is Absolutely No
Salvation and had informed us many times that he was convinced
that there is no such thing as baptism of desire or blood. To give
just one example:

Gerry
Matatics to MHFM, 4/19/2006: Dear Brothers: “I read with
interest the e-mail from [x] on his inability to receive sacraments
from [x] at the SSPX Masses in Memphis and Nashville…I'd like
to contact [x] and encourage him to attend [my talks] as well, along
with any other persecuted sedevacantists/"Feeneyites"
in his circle of friends. It sounds as though they could use some
in-person Catholic camaraderie
with an apologist of the same convictions.”

He also manifested agreement with our
position that many of the “traditionalist” and
sedevacantist priests out there are actually heretical for their
false position on the salvation issue. For instance, after a
conversation he had with a priest of the Society of St. Pius V, Gerry
told us that the priest of the Society of St. Pius V was a “public
heretic” for his position of salvation for non-Catholics via
baptism of desire.

Gerry Matatics, to
MHFM regarding the Society of St. Pius V, July 31, 2005: “…
I never stated that I would go to the SSPV chapel… We will
pray the Mass at home rather than commune with a public heretic.”

However, Gerry Matatics was recently
caught in the Pacific Northwest distributing a booklet which attacks
Fr. Feeney as excommunicated and which promotes the heretical
Protocol 122/49 (Suprema haec sacra)! Gerry Matatics has
thus radically changed his position on Outside the Church There is No
Salvation and the water baptism issue; he now sides with the
heretics. Here’s the report from baptism of desire and
salvation for non-Catholics supporter Vincent, to whom Gerry actually
gave the aforementioned pro-salvation-for-non-Catholics booklet:

“Pax Christi
! Good news about Gerry Matatics. Last week, John Lane and I spent
some time with Gerry Matatics. He told us he no longer denies Baptism
of Desire and Blood ! And that he will retract his previous position
publicly. Deo Gratias!

“One of the main citations that
helped him see the error of the Feeneyite and Dimond Brothers was
this little booklet: Titled;

"Fr. Feeney, the Pope Has
Spoken" By "a Missionary Sister of the Holy Ghost"…
Catholic Research Institute. Given the rise of Feeneyism in the
traditional circles, I HIGHLY recommend this little booklet that
Gerry Matatics gave me… in Spokane Wa. It fills in the gaps
regarding Fr. Feeney's excommunication giving the true outline, and
why the Letter from the Holy Office Aug 8th 1949 is an official act
of the Holy Office…

Vincent”

The booklet
mentioned above (which Gerry gave to Vincent) promotes Supremahaec sacra, which is the heretical 1949 letter of Cardinal
Marchetti-Selvaggiani to Archbishop Richard Cushing of Boston
concerning Fr. Feeney. It is also called Protocol 122/49. Even
someone such as Msgr. Joseph Clifford Fenton – who was also
forced to contradict Suprema haec sacra’s false
teaching on the Body of the Church, as proven in our article:
www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/fenton_book.html - admitted that it’s
not infallible:

Msgr. Joseph
Clifford Fenton, The Catholic Church and Salvation, 1958, p.
103: “… the teachings contained in Supremahaec sacra are not to be accepted as infallibly
true on the authority of this particular document.”

This heretical letter Suprema haec
sacra (which is covered in our book) teaches that souls
“invincibly ignorant” of the Catholic Faith can be saved.
It also teaches the heresy that souls who do not belong to the Body
of the Church can be saved. It also teaches that baptism of desire
saves, not only unbaptized catechumens, but those who are not
“members” of the Catholic Church, and only have an
“implicit desire” for her (translation: members of false
religions).

The heretical letter was written in
order to oppose Fr. Feeney’s preaching in Massachusetts that
all who die as non-Catholics are lost (a defined dogma). As we read
above, Gerry Matatics actually handed the aforementioned heretical
booklet to a man who believes in baptism of desire to manifest
his agreement with it. The booklet that Gerry Matatics handed to this
individual was published by “Catholic Research Institute.”
“Catholic Research Institute” is the same group which
publishes a booklet by Fr. Vaillancourt which teaches salvation for
those “outside” the Church and for Muslims and Buddhists:

Fr. Kevin
Vaillancourt, I Baptize With Water, p. 17: “Are there
any more ‘good faith’ pagans in existence? Is it
possible for the Communists of China or the faithful adherents of
Buddhism and Mohammedism of the Near and Far East to either have
never heard the Gospel, or else had the Gospel presented to them in
an erroneous light?... Can the Chinese Communist,or the
Indian Buddhist or the Pakistani Muslim be included in such a
consideration [of invincible ignorance]? Only God knows, and it is
not up to me to decide for Him. I write here merely to uphold the
dogmatic principle of the possibility of such cases today, without
admitting that all, or even a significant number of those who are
in such circumstances will achieve salvation through justification.”
(Catholic Research Institute)

Fr. Kevin
Vaillancourt, I Baptize With Water, p. 18, quoting from Fr.
Tanquery with approval: “Necessity of means, however, is not an
absolute necessity, but a hypothetical one. In certain particular
circumstances, for example, in the case of the invincible ignorance
or of incapability, actual membership in the Church can be supplied
by the desire for this membership. It is not necessary that this be
explicitly present; it can be included in a willingness and readiness
to fulfill the will of God. In this way those who are
outside the Catholic Church can achieve salvation.”
(Catholic Research Institute)

So, to quickly sum it up: Gerry
Matatics now stands with the heretics on this issue, and was caught
distributing and promoting a book on salvation which promotes
Suprema haec sacra and which is published by the heretical
“Catholic Research Institute” – a group which
teaches that there is salvation “outside” the Church and
for Muslims, Buddhists, etc. Gerry Matatics is thus an enemy of the
dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation, despite whatever
protestations to the contrary he might make. True Catholics who
adhere uncompromisingly to the salvation dogma and the necessity of
water baptism – and stand against the multitude of heretics who
use “baptism of desire” to justify salvation for members
of false religions – should [or rather, must] completely shun
Gerry Matatics, his speeches and not support him at all.In certain respects, he is more
dangerous than the many “traditionalist” priests who
openly deny this dogma; for in their cases it’s clear to all
where these heretics stand. But Gerry Matatics gives true Catholics
who defend the dogma the false impression that he stands with them,
only to compromise and change his position when surrounded by
heretics. (I don’t use the phrase “surrounded by
heretics” loosely. The groups and individuals described in this
paragraph, whose material Gerry now promotes, obstinately hold that
it’s possible for members of false religions, such as Jews,
etc. to be saved without even believing in Jesus Christ – as
documented above in the quotations from the book by Vaillancourt,
published by C.R.I.)….

When we found out about this, we
contacted Gerry to make sure that what was stated by Vincent was
true. In charity we wanted to give him a chance to deny the
accusation if, for some reason, he had been calumniated.…
Another example of compromise/dishonesty about what he claimed to
believe occurred when Gerry was a non-sedevacantist. At that time
there was a letter written by Chris Ferrara on behalf of Gerry, which
was posted prominently on Gerry’s website. The letter distanced
Gerry Matatics from sedevacantism, “Feeneyism,”
accusations of error in the New Catechism, and a denunciation of
people who go to the New Mass – all things which the heretic
Karl Keating had accused Gerry of holding. Gerry left this letter on
his website – which distanced himself from all of the
aforementioned positions and thus implied that he doesn’t find
errors in the New Catechism or think people should avoid the New
Mass, etc.– even after he informed me that he didn’t hold
the positions attributed to him in the letter. In other words, he
didn’t even agree with what was said about him in the letter
anymore; yet it remained prominently on his website for many months…
until some time after I sent a strong letter to him basically
denouncing him for leaving it up.

On Oct. 24th, Gerry responded to our
recent e-mail about what happened in Washington. He responded with an
e-mail which was addressed to Vincent, which he also sent to us. The
recent e-mail from Gerry didn’t deny anything that
Vincent said(for it is true), and confirmed it in so
many words. Strangely, however, the e-mail seemed to berate Vincent
for having let out what Gerry did in Spokane. I quote:

Gerry Matatics,
10/24/06 to Vince and MHFM: “Dear Vince: You should have
checked with me first before you started sending out potentially
misleading e-mails about me to others, which are now
circulating all over the Internet. People are now asking me for a
detailed statement regarding my latest researches and opinions
regarding all the particulars of EENS (Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus)
-- something I'm not yet ready to do, because I have more reading,
more double-checking of the facts, more reflection and prayer still
to accomplish…”

What’s
misleading? Everything Vincent said
about what Gerry did is true, as was
also confirmed by another. But notice that Gerry still berates
Vincent – and this is the key point – for
simply telling the truth about what he did and said in Spokane!…
This is the true character of Gerry Matatics coming through,
unfortunately… In our dealings with Gerry Matatics, we
discovered the hard way that he is not an honest person.…

God knows that we have been a true
friend to Gerry Matatics. We have always told him the truth about his
activity, when few others would do so. Due to his own compromise of
the Faith and promotion of materials which attack the salvation
dogma, we are now forced, to our dismay, to have to publicly denounce
him. When we caught him in compromise after compromise in the past,
we gave him every chance to explain himself. This latest incident is
merely the last in a litany of things. For us, handing out a book
attacking Fr. Feeney and promoting Protocol 122/49 (after all the
information Gerry has seen on this matter) is the last straw. Not
that a true Catholic wouldn’t be willing to forgive Gerry
Matatics, if he changed his position and repented for what he has
done – for Our Lord tells us to forgive seventy times seven
times (Mt. 18:22), if the person truly repents – but Gerry
Matatics has proven that he is not fit to be a public speaker for the
Catholic Faith. Even a believer in baptism of desire agreed with this
assessment, as he posted on one of their websites:

Tommy, Sun. Oct.
22, 2006: “It would seem prudent to me if Gerry were to take a
sabatical [sic] from public speaking and as a leader in the defense
of the Traditional cause until such time as he is committed to a
definitive position which he wants to defend. In my humble opinion
Gerry spends much of his time contradicting his own previous
positions and apologizing for his public stances, which may have
indeed caused much confusion to the church militant.”

To be a public speaker for the truths
of God’s Church one must be uncompromising, undeterred
by what people think, and completely honest at all times. Despite
his many talents and much knowledge, Gerry Matatics lacks these
spiritual qualities. Gerry needs to spend some time alone with
God, rather than constantly on the run as he appears to be. His
activity demonstrates that he needs to obtain a pure intention for
souls and the desire to please GOD ALONE. Until then, he will be
blinded (as he is now) to his grave sins of compromise and lying
(for which we have rebuked him in the past), which he doesn’t
seem to think is a problem or a sin.

When Gerry held the true positions, we
generously promoted his speaking engagements with a prominent link,
even when he didn’t link to us. We wanted to help him out; we
thought people could benefit from his talks. But we were sadly
betrayed by his lack of integrity and compromising ways again and
again.

At the 2005 St.
Joseph Forum, for instance, Gerry Matatics told the people that he
was not a sedevacantist, when he had told me via e-mail that he was.
He later admitted to me that he didn’t feel very good about
having betrayed his position in front of the audience. During this
same period, we had to charitably reprimand Gerry again and again for
failing to go public with his sedevacantist position. He finally did,
but it was not with alacrity. (We were the ones who actually had to
“break the story.”).…

In closing, we would like to say that
we will pray for the conversion of Gerry Matatics to the true
positions. We hope that he removes himself from public speaking and
meetings or disputes with individuals who don’t share his
beliefs, which is obviously an occasion of sin for him.

Even though I have taken some time to
explain this development, I would like to stress that people
shouldn’t get overworked about what Gerry Matatics believes.
People make far too much ado about individuals such as him and their
latest positions. This is because many have, quite frankly, an
impure fascination with man, especially with those reputed to be
scholars. One gets the impression that some of these individuals are
such followers of man that they would change their position
completely if this particular person did.

We thought about
not even mentioning his recent lapse into salvation heresy (and a
condemnation of Fr. Feeney) on our website, because it’s really
not very relevant to true Catholics who adhere uncompromisingly to
the Faith. However, since some still thought him to be a true
Catholic who defends the necessity of the Catholic Faith and baptism
for salvation, we felt we had to let people know that this is not the
case. In short, true Catholics shouldn’t worry about what Gerry
Matatics believes, for Gerry Matatics
certainly doesn’t worry about what true Catholics think when he
denies their beliefs in fraternal meetings with those who condemn
their position as “mortal sin.”
Gerry Matatics worries about what he thinks is “best” for
Gerry Matatics.

Update on Gerry Matatics 11/4/08 – Gerry
praises and describes as Catholic a man who believes Jews who reject
Christ can be saved

In a
public talk with a woman named Judith, which was recorded this month
(November of 2008), Gerry stated: “When
Catholics like you or me or Tom Droleskey speak out about this…”
Gerry described Tom Droleskey as a Catholic. Gerry also praised Tom
and thanked the woman for having him speak. Tom Droleskey is a
disgusting heretic who believes that Jews (and other members of false
religions) who reject Jesus Christ
can be saved. We
demonstrated that in this file.…

We asked Tom if he considered it
heretical for Fr. Fahey to teach that Jews who reject Christ can be
in the state of grace. Tom wrote back and indicated that he did not
consider it heretical, but rather that he considered it to be
Catholic teaching. Thus, Tom is a clear heretic. He holds that Jews
who reject Jesus Christ can be saved. (Tom was too cowardly to debate
us, by the way, because his heretical position would be exposed and
refuted.). Not only does Tom obstinately deny the dogma, but he
attacks those who hold the true position. In short, Tom D. belongs to
the crowd of baptism of desire heretics who not only believe that
souls can be saved in false religions, but who detest and wish to
extirpate faith in Jesus’ dogma that “unless a man is
born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom
of God” (John 3:5). In other words, he’s among the
very worst of the false traditionalist heretics.

That crowd is accurately described as
the scum of the Earth. They are abominable.…

Gerry offers a monthly public prayer
with the aforementioned woman (Judith) who is not even a
sedevacantist! That’s right. Someone we know wrote to her
just recently. He asked her if she holds the sedevacantist position.
She responded by saying that her group “does not take a
position on the Pope.” So she doesn’t even reject
Benedict XVI as an antipope! (She also promotes talks by supporters
of the SSPX.… Gerry offers a public prayer with her every
month; he calls her Catholic and promotes her. What more does one
have to say?.…

This summer we also wrote to Gerry and
asked him if he would be interested in a recorded debate/discussion
on the baptism of desire issue. We received no response. As stated in
the update to this file, one of us also spoke with Gerry for five
hours last fall. Gerry insisted that the conversation be recorded by
him, and he promised (in front of his family) to send us the tapes
the next day. He never sent the tapes. (That shouldn’t be a
surprise. It’s consistent with the activity described in the
file above.) In that conversation, Gerry confirmed that he does not
hold the infamous Protocol 122/49 to be heretical. Protocol 122/49
(which is covered in our book) is a heretical and non-infallible
document (from a pre-Vatican II cardinal) which teaches “baptism
of desire,” “invincible ignorance,” salvation for
people who are not “members of the Church,” not of the
“body of the Church” and not even “catechumens.”….

In the recent conversation, Gerry also
described a Protestant named Chuck in these terms: “Chuck
Baldwin, perhaps in the total sincerity of his heart, believing that
Protestantism is the true faith, still comes short of a true analysis
of what is wrong with the human condition…” He
describes the Protestant named Chuck as someone who might be totally
sincere in his heart. That’s not something any Catholic could
or would say. It indicates that Gerry believes that the Protestant,
who rejects Catholicism, could be in good faith – a heretical
position.…

He also holds that people can passively
attend non-Catholic funerals and weddings. One person in New Jersey
went to such a non-Catholic service passively after hearing him
speak. Those errors are significant.

MHFM's Accusations Against You - Are They True?‏

An email to Gerry Matatics - Sent: August 9, 2014
20:54:43 (CEST)

Hello, Most Holy Family Monastery has
some information concerning some of your beliefs and actions. I am
asking you these questions below since you seem to deny some of these
charges on your own homepage, i.e., the charge that you reject the
dogma on no salvation outside the Church. But, if the accusations
below are true, it would seem that MHFM are right. Are they?

1.
Is the accusations of Most Holy Family Monastery true, i.e., that you
pray with and promote non-Catholic material of the non-Catholic
Judith S., who is a promoter of the Vatican II sect and the Vatican
II antipopes; and who sponsors false traditionalist conferences that
feature pro-Novus Ordo and Vatican II speakers? and that you even
call her Catholic?

2. Is the following statement about you,
true: "Gerry Matatics rejects the dogma Outside the Church
There is No Salvation. He rejects it by accepting as Catholics those
who reject it. It proves that he is actually a Christ-denier, by
recognizing as Catholics those who believe that Jesus Christ is not
necessary for salvation. It also proves that he denies the dogma by
considering Suprema haec sacra to not be heretical, and by failing to
accept the absolute necessity of water baptism."

Is
it true that you do not consider Suprema haec sacra (also
called Protocol 122/49) to be heretical? Do you reject Suprema
haec sacra as heretical?

3. Is the following written
testimony about you, true?

“Pax Christi
! Good news about Gerry Matatics. Last week, John Lane and I spent
some time with Gerry Matatics. He told us he no longer denies Baptism
of Desire and Blood ! And that he will retract his previous position
publicly. Deo Gratias!

“One of the main citations that
helped him see the error of the Feeneyite and Dimond Brothers was
this little booklet: Titled;

"Fr. Feeney, the Pope Has
Spoken" By "a Missionary Sister of the Holy Ghost"…
Catholic Research Institute. Given the rise of Feeneyism in the
traditional circles, I HIGHLY recommend this little booklet that
Gerry Matatics gave me… in Spokane Wa. It fills in the gaps
regarding Fr. Feeney's excommunication giving the true outline, and
why the Letter from the Holy Office Aug 8th 1949 is an official act
of the Holy Office…

Vincent”

Do
you consider the view on the absolute necessity of baptism by water
and membership in the Church for salvation as an "error"?
or, if not, what exactly do you believe when it comes to this? And do
you consider the supposed excommunication of Fr. Feeney as right or
justified? or that the "the Holy Office Aug 8th 1949 is an
official act of the Holy Office"?

4.
Do you absolutely stand by your word that only unbaptized catechumens
can be saved by a desire for baptism, and you do not apply this in
anyway to non-Catholics? I ask this because many who claim to believe
in this doctrine on no salvation outside the Church, will admit when
questioned more closely that they don't
know or cannot judge who is or who is not saved outside the Church,
thus demonstrating that they actually do not believe in this dogma at
all.

5. Are you aware of that Dimond's position on the baptism
issue is that those only who are obstinate in denying the Church's
teaching on the absolute necessity of water baptism for salvation are
heretics, and not simply those "who today might hold" this
position, as you wrote. A person can be honestly mistaken on the
issue on salvation for unbaptized catechumens and be a material
heretic (as all the saints and writers were
that you mentioned); but after that person has had the evidence and
dogmas presented to him [that says] that
no one at all can be saved without first actually receiving water
baptism and thus being cleansed from original sin,
and he rejects it, one cannot [any longer] consider him an a material
heretic, since he is obstinate.

Canon
1325, 1917 Code of Canon Law: “After the reception of baptism,
if anyone, retaining the name Christian, pertinaciously
[or obstinately] denies or doubtssomething
to be believed from the truth of divine and Catholic faith, [such a
one] is a heretic.”

[Update: As of September 15, 2014,
Gerry Matatics has still not responded to my above email.]

Update on Gerry Matatics 10/1/08 – Another
conversation with Gerry

By Br. Peter Dimond, O.S.B.

10/1/08- In the fall of 2007, I (Bro.
Peter Dimond) had a lengthy telephone conversation with Gerry
Matatics. The conversation lasted about five hours. We discussed many
things, including the article which I wrote about him below. Gerry
wanted to have the conversation tape-recorded. I agreed, as long as
he would send me a copy of the tapes. In the presence of his wife and
some of his children (who were listening), Gerry promised that he
would send me a copy of the tapes the very next day. To this day
(about a year later) I have not received the tapes. Although
disappointing, this failure to live up to his word on this matter is
consistent with the activity described below.[1]

In the lengthy conversation with Gerry,
I tried again and again to get him to admit that Protocol 122/49
(also known as Supremahaec sacra) is indeed a
heretical document (see my book on salvation if you’re not
familiar with this document). Gerry refused to admit that it is
heretical, even though the document (as I pointed out to him and as
he knows) teaches salvation for people who are “not members”
of the Church; it teaches salvation for those who are not baptized
but “invincibly ignorant” of the faith; and it teaches
salvation for those who do not belong to the “body” of
the Church. Gerry might claim that he doesn’t believe that
members of false religions can be saved, or that people can be saved
without believing in Christ. However, that assertion is meaningless
if he doesn’t consider as heretical documents which teach and
justify that very heresy, and if he doesn’t denounce as
heretical “traditionalists” who adhere to that kind of
heresy. This summer I also wrote to Gerry and asked him if he
would be interested in having a recorded telephone conversation on
the salvation issue, in which we could discuss/debate the issue. I
haven’t received any response.

THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM IS NECESSARY FOR
SALVATION

To further show that the Sacrament of
Baptism is necessary for salvation, I will quote numerous infallible
statements from the Chair of St. Peter.

Pope Paul III,
The Council of Trent, Sess. 7, Can. 5 on the Sacrament
of Baptism, ex cathedra: “If anyone says that
baptism [the Sacrament] is optional, that is, not necessary for
salvation (cf. Jn. 3:5): let him be anathema.”

This infallible dogmatic definition from the
Chair of St. Peter condemns anyone who says that the Sacrament of
Baptism is not necessary for salvation. The Sacrament of Baptism is
necessary for all for salvation, first of all, because, as the
Council of Trent defines, all men (except the Blessed Virgin Mary)
were conceived in a state of original sin as a result of the sin
of Adam, the first man. The Sacrament of Baptism is also
necessary for all for salvation because it is the means by which one
is marked as a member of Jesus Christ and incorporated into His
Mystical Body. And in defining the truth that all men were conceived
in the state of Original Sin, the Council of Trent specifically
declared that the Blessed Virgin Mary was an exception to its decree
on Original Sin. But in defining the truth that the Sacrament of
Baptism is necessary for salvation, the Council of Trent made no
exceptions at all.

Pope Eugene IV,
The Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” Nov. 22,
1439: “Holy baptism, which is the gateway to the spiritual
life, holds the first place among all the sacraments; through it we
are made members of Christ and of the body of the Church. And
since death entered the universe through the first man, ‘unless
we are born again of water and the Spirit, we cannot,’ as the
Truth says, ‘enter into the kingdom of heaven’
[John 3:5]. The matter of this sacrament is real and natural
water.”

Pope Innocent
III, Fourth Lateran Council, Constitution 1, 1215, ex
cathedra: “But the sacrament of baptism is consecrated
in water at the invocation of the undivided Trinity – namely,
Father, Son and Holy Ghost – and brings salvation to both
children and adults when it is correctly carried out by anyone in
the form laid down by the Church.”

Pope Pius XI,
Quas Primas (# 15), Dec. 11, 1925 : “Indeed this kingdom
is presented in the Gospels as such, into which men prepare to enter
by doing penance; moreover, they cannot enter it except throughfaith and baptism, which, although an external rite,
yet signifies and effects an interior regeneration.”

We see here that one cannot enter the
kingdom of Heaven without faith and the external rite of baptism
(i.e., the Sacrament of Baptism). Ignorant people nowadays contradict
this fact and claim that people can reach heaven without a real and
actual water baptism. One could easily understand if a person were
ignorant of these facts and believed that a person or infant could be
Saved without the sacrament of baptism since many have been wrong on
this issue, even Saints. But when one has seen these infallible
dogmatic declarations from the Popes, and still obstinately hold to
the position that people or infants can be saved without real and
actual water baptism, he is a heretic. A heretic is a person who
obstinately, willfully and knowingly hold an opinion which he knows
to be in opposition with what the Church teach.

Pope Paul III,
The Council of Trent, Can. 2 on the Sacrament of Baptism,
Sess. 7, 1547, ex cathedra: “If anyone shall say that
real and natural water is not necessary for baptism, and on
that account those words of Our Lord Jesus Christ: ‘Unless a
man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit’ [John 3:5], are
distorted into some sort of metaphor: let him be anathema.”

Pope Benedict
XIV, Nuper ad nos, March 16, 1743, Profession of Faith:
“Likewise (I profess) that baptism is necessary for
salvation, and hence, if there is imminent danger of death, it should
be conferred at once and without delay, and that it is valid if
conferred with the right matter and form and intention by anyone, and
at any time.”

Catechism of the
Council of Trent, Baptism made obligatory after Christ’s
Resurrection, p. 171: “Holy writers are unanimous in
saying that after the Resurrection of our Lord, when He gave His
Apostles the command to go and teach all nations: baptizing them
in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,
the law of Baptism became obligatory on all who were to be saved.”

For a person to assert that salvation can be
attained invincibly or ignorantly by Jews, pagans, heretics or
schismatics without baptism or the Catholic Faith, is truly the most
evil of doctrine since it renders Faith in Jesus Christ and the true
Catholic Faith meaningless. According to this erroneous world view,
anyone who is “good” can attain eternal life.

Many people like to object against these
truths as “bitter” or “uncharitable.”But this
is not true. The “foundation of charity is faith pure and
undefiled” (Pope Pius XI, Mortalium Animos, #9).
Some will also say that they cannot understand the justice behind
these infallible declarations by God through the Popes. But it is not
our job to question God’s laws and decrees. Our job is to
believe first and understand second. Yet, if one looks at this
situation clearly, one can understand the justice behind it. Adam and
Eve brought death and original sin on every human being through their
sin of eating the forbidden fruit. Did they fall for just desiring
the fruit? NO! They fell after eating a real physical fruit. If you
cannot accept that all of humanity must be baptized in the name of
the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, how can you accept that
all of humanity fell into sin because of Adam and Eve ate a physical
fruit?

INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE

2 Corinthians
4:3: “And if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that
are lost, in whom the god of this world [Satan] hath
blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the gospel of the
glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto
them.”

Pope Paul III,
Council of Trent, Sess. 6 on Justification, Chap. 15: “…it
must be maintained that the grace of justification, although
received, is lost not only by infidelity, whereby even faith itself
is lost, but also by any other mortal sin, although faith be not
lost, thereby defending the doctrine of the divine law which
excludes from the kingdom of God not only the unbelievers,
but also the faithful who are ‘fornicators, adulterers,
effeminate, liers with mankind, thieves, covetous, drunkards,
railers, extortioners’ [1 Cor. 6:9], and all others who commit
deadly sins…”

The dogma Outside the Catholic Church There
is No Salvation has been solemnly defined at least seven times by
popes speaking from the Chair of St. Peter. Never once were any
exceptions mentioned about “invincible ignorance.” In
fact, it is just the opposite: all exceptions were always
excluded.

Pope Innocent
III, Fourth Lateran Council, Constitution 1, 1215, ex
cathedra: “There is indeed one universal Church of the
faithful, outside of which nobody at all is saved, in which
Jesus Christ is both priest and sacrifice.”

Thus, the idea that a non-Catholic who is
ignorant of the Faith can be saved is heretical; it is
contrary to the dogma that “no one,” (Pope
Pius IV; Benedict XIV; Pius IX) “nobody at all,”
(Innocent III) “nobody, even if he shed
his blood in the name of Christ” (Eugene IV) can be saved as a
non-Catholic. It is a denial of the dogma that “every human
creature” (Boniface VIII) must be a Catholic, and that
“only those” (Eugene IV) inside the bosom
and unity of the Church can achieve salvation.

Those who insist that “invincible
ignorance” can possibly save a person who dies as a
non-Catholic simply depart from and deny the dogmatic teaching of the
Catholic Church.

Fr. Francisco de
Vitoria, O.P., a famous 16th century Dominican theologian, summed up
the traditional teaching of the Catholic Church on this topic very
well. Here is how he put it: “When we postulate invincible
ignorance on the subject of baptism or of theChristian faith,
it does not follow that a person can be saved without baptismor
the Christian faith. For the aborigines to whom no preaching of
the faith or Christian religion has come will be damned for mortal
sins or for idolatry, but not for the sin of unbelief. As St. Thomas
says, however, if they do what in them lies [in their power],
accompanied by a good life according to the law of nature, it is
consistent with God’s providence that he will illuminate them
regarding the name of Christ.”

Fr. Michael
Muller, C.SS.R., The Catholic Dogma, pp. 217-218, 1888:
“Inculpable or invincible ignorance has never been and will
never be a means of salvation. To be saved, it is necessary to be
justified, or to be in the state of grace. In order to obtain
sanctifying grace, it is necessary to have the proper dispositions
for justification; that is, true divine faith in at least the
necessary truths of salvation, confident hope in the divine
Savior, sincere sorrow for sin, together with the firm purpose of
doing all that God has commanded, etc. Now, these supernatural
acts of faith, hope, charity, contrition, etc., which prepare the
soul for receiving sanctifying grace, can never
be supplied by invincible ignorance; and if invincible ignorance
cannot supply the preparation for receiving sanctifying grace, much
less can it bestow sanctifying grace itself. ‘Invincible
ignorance,’ says St. Thomas, ‘is a punishment for sin.’
(De, Infid. Q. x., art. 1).

All the people who die in cultures which
have never been penetrated by the Gospel go to Hell for sins against
the natural law and the other grave sins which they commit –
which bad will and failure to cooperate with God’s grace is the
reason He does not reveal the Gospel to them. The First Vatican
Council defined infallibly, based on Romans 1, that the one true God
can be known with certitude by the things which have been made, and
by the natural light of human reason.

St. Paul, Romans
1:18-20: “For the wrath of God is revealed from Heaven
against all ungodliness and injustice of those men that detain the
truth of God in injustice: Because that which is known of God is
manifest in them. For God hath manifested it to them. For the
invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly
seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power
also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable.”

Everyone can know with certainty that there
is a supreme spiritual being, Who is the One True God and the Creator
of the world and all that it contains. Everyone knows that God is not
something that they have carved out of wood or jade or stone. They
know that God is not the tree that they worship or the river they
worship or the rock or the snake or the sacred tree frog. They know
that these things aren’t the Creator of the universe. Every
such person knows that he is worshipping a creature rather than the
Creator. They are, as St. Paul says in verse 20, without excuse. St.
Augustine explains this well in reference to persons who died
ignorant of the Faith and without baptism.

St. Augustine
(+428): “… God foreknew that if they had lived and
the gospel had been preached to them, they would have heard it
without belief.”

St. Thomas
Aquinas, De Veritate, 14, A. 11, ad 1: Objection- “It
is possible that someone may be brought up in the forest, or among
wolves; such a man cannot explicitly know anything about the faith.
St. Thomas replies- It is the characteristic of Divine Providence to
provide every man with what is necessary for salvation…
provided on his part there is no hindrance. In the case of a man who
seeks good and shuns evil, by the leading of natural reason, God
would either reveal to him through internal inspiration what had to
be believed, or would send some preacher of the faith to him…”

St. Thomas
Aquinas, Sent. II, 28, Q. 1, A. 4, ad 4: “If a man born
among barbarian nations, does what he can, God Himself will show him
what is necessary for salvation, either by inspiration or sending a
teacher to him.”

St. Thomas
Aquinas, Sent. III, 25, Q. 2, A. 2, solute. 2: “If a man
should have no one to instruct him, God will show him, unless he
culpably wishes to remain where he is.”

"It is not
without sorrow that we have learned another not less pernicious
error, which has been spread in several parts of Catholic countries,
and has been imbibed by many Catholics, who are of opinion that all
those who are not at all members of the true Church of Christ, can be
saved: Hence they often discuss the question concerning the future
fate and condition of those who die without having professed the
Catholic faith, and give the most frivolous reasons in support of
their wicked opinion . . . ."

"We must
mention and condemn again that most pernicious error, which has been
imbibed by certain Catholics, who are of the opinion that those
people who live in error and have not the true faith, and are
separated from Catholic unity, may obtain life everlasting. Now this
opinion is most contrary to Catholic faith, as is evident from the
plain words of our Lord, (Matt. xviii. 17 ; Mark xvi. 16; Luke x. 16;
John iii. 18) as also from the words of St. Paul, (II. Tim. Iii. 11)
and of St. Peter (II. Peter. ii. 1). To entertain opinions contrary
to this Catholic faith is to be an impious wretch."

"We
therefore again reprobate, proscribe, and condemn all and every one
of these perverse opinions and doctrines, and it is our absolute will
and command that all sons of the Catholic Church shall hold them as
reprobated, proscribed, and condemned. It belongs to our Apostolic
office to rouse your Episcopal zeal and watchfulness to do all in
your power to banish from the minds of the people such impious and
pernicious opinions, which lead to indifference of religion, which we
behold spreading more and more, to the ruin of souls. Oppose all your
energy and zeal to these errors and employ zealous priests to impugn
and annihilate them, and to impress very deeply upon the minds and
hearts of the faithful the great dogma of our most holy religion,
that salvation can be had only in the Catholic faith. Often exhort
the clergy and the faithful to give thanks to God for the great gift
of the Catholic faith."

St. Augustine,
Tractate 89, on John 15:22-23- “What, then, does He
[Jesus] mean by the words, If I had not come and spoken
unto them, they had not had sin? [John 15:22] Was it that
the Jews were without sin before Christ came to them in the flesh?
Who, though he were the greatest fool, would say so?... But when
He went on to say, But now they have no excuse for their sin,
some may be moved to inquire whether those to whom Christ neither
came nor spoke, have an excuse for their sin. For if they have not,
why is it said here that these had none, on the very ground that He
did come and speak to them? And if they have, have they it to the
extent of thereby being barred from punishment, or of receiving it in
a milder degree? To these inquiries, with the Lord's help and to the
best of my capacity, I reply, that such have an excuse, not for
every one of their sins, but for this sin of not believing on Christ,
inasmuch as He came not and spoke not to them.”

Pope Gregory
XVI, Summo Iugiter Studio, May 27, 1832, on no salvation
outside the Church: “Finally some of these misguided people
attempt to persuade themselves and others that men are not saved only
in the Catholic religion, but that even heretics may attain
eternal life… You know how zealously Our predecessors
taught that article of faith which these dare to deny, namely
the necessity of the Catholic faith and of unity for salvation…
Omitting other appropriate passages which are almost numberless in
the writings of the Fathers, We shall praise St. Gregory the
Great who expressly testifies that THIS IS INDEED THE TEACHING OF
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. He says: ‘The holy universal Church
teaches that it is not possible to worship God truly except in her
and asserts that all who are outside of her will not be
saved.’”

COMMUNION WITH HERETICS

In this context, it is also important
to mention the Church's teaching concerning communion with heretics.
The traditional Catholic Church's teaching which forbids a man to
receive the Catholic sacraments of The Holy Eucharist, Penance,
Confirmation, Extreme Unction, Matrimony and
Holy Orders from all heretical priests –
as well as Her teaching that all sacramental communions with known
heretics, whether they be priests or laymen, is sinful – is
based directly on the Holy Bible, and was preached from the very
start of the Church by the Holy Apostles.

Titus 3:10-11 “A
man that is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid:
Knowing that he, that is such an one, is subverted, and sinneth,
being condemned by his own judgment.”

If we find out that someone is a
heretic, Holy Scripture makes it crystal clear that we must avoid
him, except for the purpose of converting him to the true Faith.
Douay Rheims Bible Commentary explains that the words “By
his own judgment” means that “Other offenders are judged,
and cast out of the church, by the sentence of the pastors of the
same church. Heretics, more unhappy, run out of the church of their
own accord, and by doing so, give judgment and sentence against their
own souls.” Therefore, “If any man come to you and bring
not this doctrine, do not receive him into the house nor say to him:
"God speed you." For, he who says to him "God speed
you" communicates with his wicked works.” (2nd John
1:10-11) This verse of St. John the Apostle also makes it clear that
everyone, whether priest or layman, have a right and indeed a duty,
to judge between whether a man is a heretic or not.

Contrary to what many claim today, we
see that the Holy Bible not only tells us to not commune
sacramentally with heretics, but that we “communicates with his
wicked works” if we would dare to enter into religious
communion with him, or receive the
sacraments from them. Thus, if we would like to receive the
sacraments, we are obligated to know that the priest we receive them
from is a Catholic, seeing that otherwise we “communicates with
his wicked works”. So important was this doctrine of separation
from the ungodly that the Holy Bible over and over repeats this
truth.

2nd Thessalonians
3:6 “We charge you, brethren, in the name of Our Lord Jesus
Christ, that you withdraw from every brother walking disorderly
and not according to the tradition received from us. And, if
any man does not obey, note that man, and do not keep company with
him.”

From the very start of the Church,
various heretics and heretical sects tried to lure people away from
the true Faith, and because of this, Our Lord Jesus Christ also
inspired the authors of the Bible to repeatedly write about the
importance of this doctrine.

Romans 16:17:20
“Now I beseech you, brethren, to mark them who make
dissensions and offences contrary to the doctrine which you have
learned, and avoid them. For they that are such,
serve not Christ our Lord, but their own belly; and by pleasing
speeches and good words, seduce the hearts of the innocent. For your
obedience is published in every place. I rejoice therefore in you.
But I would have you to be wise in good, and simple in evil. And the
God of peace crush Satan under your feet speedily. The grace of our
Lord Jesus Christ be with you.”

St. Paul here gives some good reasons
why Catholics must avoid non-Catholics. Following the devil's
temptations as well as their own pride, all heretics fool themselves
into believing that they have found out the “true”
meaning of the Christian Faith long after the Church was founded and
begun by Apostolic Succession after the resurrection of Our Lord.
Heresy as a crime is mainly a sin of pride, and as a result, these
people will also cause “dissensions and offences contrary to
the doctrine which you have learned
[from the Apostles]” which
could harm an untold number of souls. “For they that are
such, serve not Christ our Lord, but their own belly; and by pleasing
speeches and good words, seduce the hearts of the innocent.”

The greatest reason why the Church have
always condemned receiving the sacraments from heretics or being in
communion with them is that in very many cases, the heretic will
corrupt the life and faith of the Christian. St. Paul speaks at
length of this in his letters in the Holy Bible: “Be not
seduced: Evil communications corrupt good manners.
Awake, ye just, and sin not. For some have not the knowledge of God,
I speak it to your shame. (1st Corinthians 15:33-34) If we want to
save our own soul from the eternal hellfire, we cannot allow human
friendships and family to corrupt our faith. If we receive the
sacraments from or commune with heretics, the result is very often
that we will become like them: “He that walketh with the
wise, shall be wise: a friend of fools shall become like to them.”
(Proverbs 13:20)

Another great reason why the Church
condemns sacramental communion with heretics or schismatics is that
we, by this act, shows externally to them that they are fine where
they are, thus confirming them in their mortal sin.
Because heretics and schismatics would
conclude that a Catholic who worshipped with them approved of their
errors or rebellion, the Congregation for the Propagation of the
Faith warned in 1729:

“When
they see Catholics go to their [heretical and schismatical] churches,
assist at their rites, and participate in their sacraments, should
not one believe (or at least fear) that from this fact alone they
would be more greatly confirmed in their errors, and also be
persuaded by this example that they are walking the straight path to
salvation?

“From
this it follows that it is most difficult to avoid the danger of
pernicious scandal to heretics and schismatics themselves. Wherefore,
a Catholic cannot be safe in his conscience if he worships together
with them this way.” (SC de Prop. Fide, Instruction (Pro
Mission. Orient.), 1729, Fontes 7:4505)

Reason itself dictates that this may
never be done. “Let no man deceive you with vain words. For
because of these things cometh the anger of God upon the children of
unbelief. Be ye not therefore partakers with them.
For you were heretofore darkness, but now light in the Lord. Walk
then as children of the light. For the fruit of the light is in all
goodness, and justice, and truth; Proving what is well pleasing to
God: And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of
darkness, but rather reprove them. For the things that
are done by them in secret, it is a shame even to speak of. But all
things that are reproved, are made manifest by the light; for all
that is made manifest is light. Wherefore he saith: Rise thou that
sleepest, and arise from the dead: and Christ shall enlighten thee.
See therefore, brethren, how you walk circumspectly: not as
unwise...” (Ephesians 5:6-15)

Thus, contrary to the many heretics who
nowadays teach that one may be in communion with heretics, St. Paul
tells us through the power of the Holy Spirit that we are to “have
no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather
reprove them.” We must
thus do all in our power to reprove them, and must abstain from every
act that could be taken by others to mean that we are in communion
with heretics. “I will not communicate with the
choicest of them... Depart from me, ye malignant ones!”
(Psalm 140:4; 118:115)

Pope Pius XI,
Mortalium Animos, #9, Jan. 6, 1928: “Everyone knows that
John himself, the Apostle of love, who seems to reveal in his Gospel
the secrets of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and who never ceased to
impress on the memories of his followers the new commandment ‘Love
one another,’ altogether forbade any intercourse with
those who professed a mutilated and corrupt form of Christ’s
teaching: ‘If any man come to you and bring not this
doctrine, receive him not into the house nor say to him: God speed
you’ (II John 10).”

From the very beginning of the Church's
councils, the biblical truth that true Christians (that is,
Catholics) could not partake in the “holy” rites of
heretics, Jews or infidels, nor receive the sacraments from them
(even though their sacraments are valid) has always been affirmed.

III Council of Constantinople, 680-681:
“If any ecclesiastic or layman shall go into the
synagogue of the Jews or the meetinghouses of the heretics
to join in prayer with them, let them be deposed and deprived of
communion [excommunicated]. If any bishop or priest or deacon
shall join in prayer with heretics, let him be suspended from
communion.”

Here we see that the Church teaches
that not only are we forbidden to commune sacramentally with a
heretic or a Jew, but that we may not even go into their houses “to
join in prayer with them”. A man or even a “bishop or
priest or deacon” who disobeyed this biblical truth was to be
immediately excommunicated from the Church according to the Church's
infallible teaching.

Pope Vigilius,
Second Council of Constantinople, 553, ex cathedra:
“The heretic, even though he has not been condemned formally by
any individual, in reality brings anathema on himself, having cut
himself off from the way of truth by his heresy. What reply can such
people make to the Apostle when he writes: As for someone who
is factious, after admonishing him once or twice, have
nothing more to do with him,knowing that such a
person is perverted and sinful; he is self-condemned (Titus
3:10).”

Pope Vigilius makes it clear that
Catholics may not even communicate sacramentally with undeclared
heretics, since all heretics are automatically excommunicated. This
means that we may never enter the “Churches” of heretics,
worship with them, or receive the sacraments from them. A Catholic
who receives the Holy Eucharist and Penance from any
heretic thus sins mortally,
for he disobeys the Law of the Church and God while doing so, and it
does not matter whether the heretic is declared or undeclared,
formally excommunicated or automatically excommunicated as a heretic
as we can see from the infallible teaching of Pope Vigilius in the
Second Council of Constantinople.

1917
Code of Canon Law, Canon 1258.1: “It is unlawful
for the faithful to assist in any active
manner, or to take part in the sacred services of
non-Catholics.”

A Catholic
actively assists at a traditional Mass by his presence when it is
celebrated. This is a true form of active assistance or
participation, and according to Catholic teaching constitutes
“cooperation or common action with another in the prayers and
functions of worship.”

As explained by
Rev. Szal in his book Communication of Catholics with Schismatics,
on Dec. 5, 1668, the Holy Office ordered a bishop to instruct his
people not to go to Mass or other Divine offices in the churches of
schismatics or heretics, and to warn them that THEY WERE NOT BOUND
BY THE PRECEPT OF HEARING MASS WHEN THERE WAS NO CELEBRATION OF A
CATHOLIC MASS, which means that if there is no Catholic Mass
available (a Catholic rite said by a Catholic priest), 1) one cannot
attend a non-Catholic Mass, and 2) one is not held to the precept of
hearing Holy Mass. To fulfill your Sunday obligation or obtain
sacramental graces at Mass requires active assistance or
participation. This is an all-or-nothing proposition. You either
actively assist or you don’t.

Pius
VI, Charitas (# 29), April 13, 1791: “Keep as far from
you as possible all intrusion and schism.… Above all, avoid
and condemn the sacrilegious intruders..… Keep away from
all intruders… do not hold communion with them, especially in
divine worship.”

Catholics are explicitly forbidden to
knowingly pray in communion with notorious or known heretics or
receive the sacraments from them as Pope Leo X makes perfectly clear.

Pope Leo X,
Fifth Lateran Council, Session 8, ex cathedra: “And
since truth cannot contradict truth, we define that every statement
contrary to the enlightened truth of the faith is totally false and
we strictly forbid teaching otherwise to be permitted. We decree that
all those who cling to erroneous statements of this kind, thus sowing
heresies which are wholly condemned, should be avoided in
every way and punished as detestable and odious heretics
and infidels who are undermining the Catholic faith.

“… All false Christians and
those with evil sentiments towards the faith, of whatever race or
nation they may be, as well as heretics
and those stained with some taint of heresy, or Judaizers, are
to be totally excluded from the company of Christ’s faithful
and expelled from any position, especially from the Roman curia, and
punished with an appropriate penalty…”

So, the Pope just said infallibly that
all heretics should be avoided in every way (that has to do with
religious communion and other unnecessary dealings with them). Note
that you can only know that someone is a heretic if you yourself have
obtained this knowledge of the person in question. Thus, if you know
your priest to be a heretic, you are obliged to avoid him “in
every way”, and may not approach him for the sacraments.

When we enter
into sacramental communion with heretics or receive the sacraments
from them, we give scandal to our neighbor, make the heretic who
distributes the sacrament commit mortal sin, and most importantly,
sin against God and Heaven. Indeed, the heretical priest who
consecrates the host or gives out the sacraments commits a mortal sin
of sacrilege at that very moment. A person who thus receives the
sacraments of the Holy Eucharist or Penance from a person he knows is
a heretic that is automatically excommunicated or formally
excommunicated, actually makes this heretic sin mortally by receiving
the sacrament from him! Only a thoroughly hardhearted human would
continue to go to him after knowing about this fact, receiving the
fruit of his sacrileges, mortal sins and profanations of our Lord...
The heretical priest commits a mortal sin when he confects the
sacraments, as well as when he gives it out, yet the person receiving
the sacrament from him couldn't care less about the mortal sins of
sacrilege and profanation of our Lord that are enacted in front of
him. In truth, “You help the ungodly, and you are joined in
friendship with those who hate the Lord; and therefore you did indeed
deserve the wrath of the Lord.” (2ndParalipomenon
19:2)

Hermenegild, a
young Visigoth prince, was put to death by his heretical father
because he courageously refused to receive his Easter Communion from
an Arian bishop. The martyr knew that the Eucharist is the sacred
symbol of Catholic unity and that we are not allowed to approach the
Holy Table in company with those who are not in the true Church. A
sacrilegious consecration gives heretics the real possession of the
divine mystery, if the priestly character be in him who dares to
offer sacrifice to the God whom he blasphemes. But the Catholic, who
knows that he may not so much as pray with heretics, shudders at the
sight of the profanation and would rather die than take a share by
his presence in insulting our Redeemer in that very Sacrifice and
Sacrament which were instituted in order that all may be made one in
God.

St.
Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Third Part, Q. 82, Art. 9,
Reply to Objection 1, On the contrary: “By refusing to hear
the masses of such priests [sinful, heretical or excommunicated
priests], or to receive Communion from them, we are not
shunning God’s sacraments; on the contrary, by so doing we are
giving them honor: but what we shun is the sin of the unworthy
ministers... Moreover, [Pope St.] Gregory says (Dial. ii.) that
‘the faithless father sent an [heretical] Arian bishop to his
son [St. Hermenegild], for him to receive sacrilegiously the
consecrated Communion at his hands. But, when the Arian bishop
arrived, God’s devoted servant rebuked him [and refused
the communion from his hands], as was right for him to do.”

Pope
St. Gregory the Great, The Dialogues: “It was the feast
of Easter. At an early hour of the night when all was still, his
wicked father sent an Arian bishop to him with this message, that if
he [Hermenegild] would receive Communion from his hands [the
Communion of a sacrilegious consecration] he should be restored to
favor. True to his Creator, the man of God gave a merited reproof to
the Arian bishop, and, with holy indignation, rejected his sinful
offer; for though his body lay prostrate in chains, his soul stood on
ground beyond the reach of tyranny. The bishop therefore returned
whence he had come. The Arian father raged, and straightaway sent his
lictors, bidding them to repair to the prison of the unflinching
confessor of the Lord, and murder him on the spot. They obeyed: they
entered the prison; they cleft his skull with a sword; they took away
the life of the body, and slew what he, the slain one, had sworn to
count as vile. Miracles soon followed, which testified to the true
glory of Hermenegild…”

If it was a
mortal sin to receive Holy Communion from the hands of a notorious
heretic or excommunicated person then it is a mortal sin now too, and
all who claim otherwise with knowledge of the dogmas of the church
are excommunicated heretics. Any law that attempts to change this
dogmatic law or diminish it in any way is a heretical law that makes
a mockery of the blood of Saint Hermenegild.

St.
Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Third Part, Q. 82, Art. 9,
Reply to Objection 2, I answer that: “The unity of the
mystical body is the fruit of the true body received. But
those who receive or minister unworthily [such as the heretics or
excommunicated], are deprived of the fruit [the unity of
the Faith], as was said above (7; 80, 4). And therefore,
those who belong to the unity of the Faith [the Catholics] are
not to receive the sacrament from their dispensing [from the heretics
or excommunicated]... [since the] heretical, schismatical,
excommunicate, or even [notoriously] sinful priests, although they
have the power to consecrate the Eucharist, yet they do not make a
proper use of it; on the contrary, they sin by using it. But
whoever communicates with another who is in sin, becomes a sharer in
his sin.”

Real Catholics (such as St.
Hermenegild) absolutely shudders at the thought of that a
sacrilegious profanation is committed against our true Lord’s
true Body and Blood by an unworthy heretical minister. True Catholics
will certainly not be part of this profanation and sacrilege of Our
Lord or give their approval of it when this most grievous sin is
committed in front of them, as we have just seen.

Copyright information: All videos and articles on our site are free to copy and share for free. Please remember to also include live links to the source of the information.
We are looking for translators who have the skill to make a good translation of important articles for the salvation of souls. We are also in need of translators who can translate Saint Bridget's Revelations into different languages. If you can help us on this important work, please contact us here.
We need your help! We are spending all the time our expenses among things like websites, webhotels, and giving away free material, dvds and books in order to warn people and tell them the truth. So if you like the material and want to help us—and be yourself a sharer—in saving souls, then please make a donation, pray for us and help us spread it in order to help our beloved brothers and sisters who have not found this information yet. If you have been graced by God with the means to do so, please support our work. Any donation that you can give is highly appreciated and much needed! Help us help our beloved brothers' and sisters' souls. Your Support Counts! All for the Glory of God and the salvation of souls! Please click here!
"And whosoever shall give to drink to one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, amen I say to you, he shall not lose his reward." Matthew 10:42